“Apple and Psystar have agreed to pursue a mediated settlement to their legal dispute over Psystar’s Open Computers,” Tom Krazit reports for CNET. “The Mac Observer turned up a court filing from earlier this month in the Apple-Psystar case noting that the two parties have agreed to participate in the Alternative Dispute Resolution process.”
“ADR, as it is known, is a way to bypass the costly legal process as well as keep the outcome private, which is one of Apple’s favorite words. I downloaded the document in question from the U.S. District Court of Northern California’s Web site (click here for PDF), and it says that Apple and Psystar have agreed to three portions of the ADR process: non-binding arbitration, early neutral evaluation, and mediation. The parties have agreed to hold their sessions by January 31, 2009,” Krazit reports.
Full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Jen” for the heads up.]
So, this means that they agree to talk???
en
In these types of legal disputes it’s just one step on the path before court. If you don’t try to resolve the dispute before certain motions are ruled on by the Judge then you risk pissing off the Judge. At the end of the ADR process Apple can still take Psystar to court and clean their clock.
My guess is Psystar is looking to sell the farm to Apple and scurry away before anyone notices. With the legal fee mounting and the economic condition such as it is, the brothers are just look to get out of the mess with enough pocket money and cash to start-up their next scam business.
It is Apple’s way of getting the competition out of the way, without stuffing a stick of dynamite in Psystar’s throat. Completely destroying a rival company isn’t Apple’s style- at least in public. Look between the lines.
I imagine the meeting will go something like this…
Steve Jobs: “ok, I agree not to rip your @#$s off and shove them down your throat, I agree not to sue you, your children, and your grandchildren into oblivion, and I agree not to make you wear turtlenecks for 100 years.
Pystar guys: we agree not to ever sell our crap again, or to mess with Apple.
What it means is that Apple will pay Psystar a bunch of cash. Apple avoids substantial downside risk as the illegality of Apple’s EULA will not be ruled on and no legal precedent will be set.
And Psystar will scurry off and do something else with the millions gained from Apple.
Normally, Apple would pay cash and move on. However, in this case, they may not. Steve’s lawyers will probably recommend it, but Steve will probably want to settle this with no cash being involved. Along the lines of what Jim – TIV said:
We will not sue you and your grandchildren out of existence, and you will no longer sell your crap or try to mess with us. Turtleneck optional.
As the settlement will likely have a very tight non-disclosure clause, we will probably never know for sure how it went down, unless one of the Psystar guys brags (or breaks down and ‘confesses’ on Oprah) about it.
And to think, I always thought that “ADR” meant automatic dialogue replacement. Guess I’ve been in the edit room to long.
(Go Apple.)
If these two companies want so much secrecy as to the resolution, this can’t be good for Apple or its image. Why would they agree to let it go to arbitration if they have Psystar’s throat? If Psystar voilated the EULA of Apple’s software, they have every obligation to contend their argument in open court. Wouldn’t that be better for their stock? Me thinks that perhaps Psystar did not violate the intellectual property of Apple Inc and they know it. Maybe once you buy something it is yours so long as you don’t change it when you sell it again.
Opie:
Read my lips. Psystar violated the terms of the Apple EULA. The arbitration is MANDATORY, not voluntary. Apple would be demonstrating bad faith in not accepting court ordered arbitration. Apple has conceded nothing and shows no interest in conceding anything. They will go through the motions to please the judge, then turn loose their dogs. Psystar is a dead duck.
“Me thinks that perhaps Psystar did not violate the intellectual property of Apple Inc “
Methinks Apple can’t risk a court saying that Psystar didn’t violate the EULA.
So Psystar gets paid some money and slinks away.
@Zeke
Are you stupid or what?
“ADR, as it is known, is a way to bypass the costly legal process as well as keep the outcome private”
This is a court order? Which court would that be? The I have my head in my a** court?
Not sure its the same but… in a divorce if two parties dont agree… they have a pretrial.. to talk over things and settle an agreement instead of wasting the judges time… If they still say screw you im takin it all… then they wait x amount of months and go to court. Not saying this is the same but if I remember my stupid mandatory law course I took in college.. I do believe it works that way in other situations.
Until it’s known, which it is not, who requested ADR, you can’t come to any conclusions. People assume it’s Apple, but they have no way of knowing. I’m guessing it’s Psyster.
Why would Psystar request it when they are already moving as though they are doing what is legal? I would think Apple filed for arbitration since the verdict can be silenced from everyone not inside and the money exchanged is not disclosed to the detriment of stockholders either way. Besides if Apple goes to court and the court says the EULA is illegal or worse yet that Psystar didn’t violate the agreement. Who looks bad? Why open yourself up to litigation if you don’t have to.
For the most part,unless a court orders it BOTH parties must agree to arbitration. Even then one party can refuse to participate and demand it’s day in court (at the expense of angering the court and in some states losing some rights although this must be carefully balanced against constitutional rights).
In this case it works for both parties. The agreement, whatever it is won’t set a legal precedent. It won’t become part of the public record as a court case would, and it costs less, giving Apple more money to use to buy Psystar off.
And as this is non binding, if either party disagrees with the outcome they can still get their day in court.